Macca

It's the cricket thread curse. It rivals the Norm Smith curse!

I think the best we can hope for is a quick-fire innings from Dave Warner. Like to see him tee off and maybe get a ton. They'll probably call it off about an hour or so before stumps (what is the rule in that situation?) Haddin has been terrific and his foot movement has been very good. He's taken a number of very good catches down the leg side. With the ability that Siddle, Starc and Pattinson have with the bat, Haddin can bind it all together at no.7. Harris can smack a few as well! We really need Brad's experience in the home series. Wade or Paine will get their chance in time.

I'd say the reality is that in a country of 1.3 billion people, there is a truckload more money to be made out of TV rights rather than gate receipts. The BCCI don't have to spend a penny this way. The TV companies have to provide all the infrastructure, cameras, commentators etc etc whilst all the BCCI have to do is cash the cheques. The facilities and seating at most of the grounds in India isn't always the best. Not sure the BCCI make much of an effort to get people to the Tests (that 5 day pass is a good example of effectively pushing people away) Outside of Australia and England, Test cricket crowds have been on the wane for quite some time. Once again, there are no easy solutions to the problem. Seems Rupert is involved with the BCCI by the looks of it ... Star TV bags rights for Indian cricket Another interesting partner is ESPN. A few years ago they paid 1 billion dollars for the rights to the t20 Champions League (for 10 years) Some big players getting involved.

The practical way of looking at is to possibly make the best of a bad situation. Maybe that's what CA decided to do a few years ago. In other words, they could see what the future had in store and got in for their chop. Why else would we play 7 ODI's against India every year? In 2011 we ended up playing a 2 Test series against South Africa in South Africa because of our commitments in India (mixed in with the t20 Champions League) Ordinarily, in October this year, we might have played a couple of Tests against one of the smaller Test Nations as a lead in to this years home Ashes series. However, the money on offer from when we play India is hard to resist. The caveat might also be that we may not be able to send a team to India with our 2nd string quicks. The money from the BCCI may well be conditional. In a perfect world none of Harris, Siddle, Starc, Pattinson and Bird (if fit) would be part of that One-day squad. It's not an ideal warm up for the Ashes but if any of them are in India for those ODI's, that might tell a story. The truth is that Australia and England are keeping Test cricket at the forefront. In the future I can see both home and away Ashes series' being played over 3 years instead of 4 years. As it is, we're back in England in 2015. The general public in India still love their Test cricket but they're being pushed away from it. Pricing has gone through the roof from what I've heard and quite often a 5 day pass needs to be purchased. Easier to watch it on the tele (where the viewing numbers are obviously still huge) The BCCI are not making it easy for themselves to get good crowds at the Test matches but with all their other huge revenue streams, they simply don't need those big crowds. Much more money to be made elsewhere. There are no obvious or easy answers to the whole situation. On a brighter note we may see a bit of cricket tonight. The sun is doing it's best to get out (apparently)

... Cricket Australia's Annual report 2012 (go to page 15 and 'enlarge' for the numbers) Looks like we had quite a healthy surplus of 45 million for that 2011/12 financial year with that figure being helped out enormously from the income derived out of all the ODI's involving India in early 2012. I've heard that CA pocketed 6 million from the BCCI for every ODI that India played in Australia in early 2012. It's any wonder we have an agreement to play India every year. Not a big fan of ODI's but they do bring in the big $$$'s for CA (Especially when we play India) Another aspect of cricket that the fans just have to accept. That money generated would help subsidise Shield cricket (which must cost millions to run) Obviously, Shield cricket is essential in helping to create a winning Test side. Other nations are endeavouring to do the same (playing against India in ODI's) and it largely explains why India doesn't play as much Test cricket as a few other countries. They are too busy playing ODI's. It also explains why certain countries won't take on India with regards to their refusal to use DRS. Why bite the hand that feeds you? India rules the cricket world in a financial sense and that won't be changing in the foreseeable future. It's simple economics. India generates 80%+ of the income derived out of cricket so they get to call the shots to a large extent. Of course, the IPL with all the players involved reaping lots of $$$'s only complicates things even further. To me, the ODI games are often meaningless but it's all about the money. (who can ever remember who wins a One-day series?)

US Open starts on Monday (Tuesday 1.00am AEST) ... Sam Stosur's win against Victoria Azarenka a valuable boost on eve of US Open Mens and Ladies seeds ... Novak Djokovic Rafael Nadal Andy Murray David Ferrer Tomáš Berdych Juan Martín del Potro Roger Federer Richard Gasquet Stanislas Wawrinka Milos Raonic Kei Nishikori Tommy Haas John Isner Jerzy Janowicz Nicolás Almagro Fabio Fognini Serena Williams Victoria Azarenka Agnieszka Radwańska Sara Errani Li Na Caroline Wozniacki Petra Kvitová Angelique Kerber Jelena Janković Roberta Vinci Samantha Stosur Kirsten Flipkens Ana Ivanovic Maria Kirilenko Sloane Stephens Sabine Lisicki

Starc has had a few injury concerns and the selectors might decide to put him in cotton wool until he starts getting prepared for the Ashes. I know we play a series of five ODI's against England before going to India for another seven ODI's (played in the month of October) No real sense having Harris, Siddle or Starc involved in these games. Those 3 need to rest up for 5 or 6 weeks. Those ODI's are an ideal time to give Faulkner, Coulter-Nile, Mitch Marsh, Hazlewood, Henriques and a few others some valuable exposure. If our fast bowlers are definitely going to play t20 cricket (the money on offer is almost impossible to resist) then the Australian selectors might decide to keep our Test fast bowlers away from the ODI's and the domestic 50 over games*. England are in a unique position where their players are tied to central contracts. Because their season starts in late April, it means their players are largely unavailable for the IPL. Shield cricket, Test cricket, the IPL and maybe the Big Bash is plenty of cricket for Harris, Starc, Pattinson, Siddle and Bird. (the IPL pays a truckload more than the Big Bash so the latter doesn't represent that much of an issue) For the batsmen, they just need to learn how to adjust their tempo within all 3 forms of the game. Many other batsmen around the World can adapt to the 3 forms of the game (especially the South Africans) so our players really don't have any excuses. *Effectively, the ECB pay their players to not play in the IPL. Maybe CA could do the same with our bevy of fast bowlers. They've always had a few bob in the coffers so it might be money well spent

... The weekends fixtures The match of the round would have to be the Tuesday morning clash between Manchester United & Chelsea (5am) Aston Villa vs Liverpool should be a cracker as well (2.30am early Sunday morning) Here's a BBC podcast previewing the round of games ... Friday Night Preview with Dan Walker Fulham vs Arsenal kick things off this evening at 9.45pm. The Gunners will be desperate for the 3 points.

Harris bowled really well again in this session - give him a good spell after this series and let him play a maximum of 2 Shield games before the 1st Test in Brisbane. Same goes for Siddle. They don't need to play in the ODI's (if the selectors are considering either of them) Starc probably needs some more work before that 1st Test. He's got his pace up so far today - a little wayward early but some good signs. Clarke was at wide mid off for parts of his spell and as long as Mitch doesn't mind that, it's an excellent move by Pup. I like the idea of having the skipper giving some sage advice to the young quicks. Clarke reads the game very well. Definitely bending his back today is Mitchell. When he gets it up to 145k's (90mph) he looks far more dangerous. He bowled a good sustained spell in this session. I've heard Boycott, Lillee and a number of others say that line and length can always happen eventually - but first of all get the pace up.

Here's 2 from Rockin' Rod Stewart ... Steve Cropper plays lead on 'Stone Cold Sober' Macca 13.6 http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-hILPGd0RJY

I'm not changing my original vote - I'm gonna have to live with it (which means Watto and Smith don't get a guernsey - that'll teach me for voting early ) If I were to change it Marsh and Henriques would make way for Watson and Smith. A week is a long time in cricket (as well as any other sport!)

Dee-luded ... I don't discount the importance of a good environment with the proper leadership values and coaching etc. Just don't see all that as importantly as you do. Especially in cricket. Maybe you need to give a bit of ground here. Let's not forget we only have 1 world class A grade cricketer in the team. Awfully difficult to win games of cricket against quality opposition given that scenario.

I reckon there's not enough down time for the quicks these days. Fairly sure McGrath made mention of this some time ago. Fast bowlers used to get long lays offs but with the 3 forms of the game and all the money involved, there just isn't the same opportunity to rest up as there once was. Either that, or it's just a coincidence (and you know what they say about coincidences!) Both Patto and Bird were bowling without a lot of penetration in England and now that we know about their respective back injury's, it can now be explained. If it is too much cricket, how is that fixed? Harris played in the IPL on a nice contract and broke down with an achilles injury. He's come back well but if the injury was worse, we could have been in dire straits. Cummins, Pattinson and now Bird. Harris and Starc have had their issues. The most common problem is related to the back which can be a sure sign that it's related to too much cricket.

At issue here is whether a batsman who has made it all the way to the best 6 batsmen in the Country needs a captain or a coach to make him play better. This is not footy where you're one of 400 who play every week. The different circumstances are extreme. You're either an A grade batsman or you generally won't have a long career - it's as simple as that. When you're out in the middle you're on your own (although whilst there is a lot to be said about batting as a partnership, you've still got to negotiate top quality bowling on your own) Boof and/or Pup have way less influence than many might think. They can't hold their hand. By the time a batsman reaches Test level he should know what to do. Even at 22 years old. Our lack of leaders within the team is a cyclical thing. I maintain that cricket needs a highly active selfish gene. Many just play for themselves and whilst this contributes to the overall team effort, it doesn't necessarily mean they're ever going to be good leaders. It's said that the best captains generally are batsmen who bat in the top order - our top order has been largely dysfunctional for a while now. Therefore we lack leaders. It's fairly simple. Once our top order gets to be good again, another leader or 2 might emerge. Watson made 176 yesterday. Did he bat for the team or for himself? Did he lead by example? Did he show leadership out in the middle? Was his performance great for himself or for the team? Or both? Who's the next obvious captain for England? It might be Prior as Trott, Pietersen or Bell don't stand out as likely candidates. KP has been tried before and the other 2 just don't seem the type. Maybe even Swann would be the next choice. Cook isn't going anywhere so it's not an issue for them right now. We should be saying the same about Clarke. I just hope all these losses isn't going to effect his batting. It's not his fault we're not a good team - in fact, he's doing more than enough and is a tactically sound captain.

I've defended Clarke numerous times on this thread and continue to do so (see the post below for another example) Those who are overly critical of Clarke are damned by their own words. Same as those who have been overly critical of the much maligned Watson. By the way, Shane has made the most runs in this series by an Aussie (392 - which is the 2nd most runs in the series by any player) As for Faulkner, if he picks up a few wickets in this Test anything could happen in the future. He's a bowling all-rounder (his figures indicate this) so he doesn't necessarily have to bat in the top 7 going forward. I've never regarded him as anyone who could bat in the top 6 (and have said so in this thread) but believe he might make it as one of the 3 seamers. If he does have a good all round game then it's a nice problem to have. Aren't we looking for competition for all the spots? There may also have been other reasons that we played 5 bowlers (if we assume Watson isn't bowling in this game) Maybe the selectors have drawn a line through 3 batsmen (for now) and have decided (already) to go in a different direction for the 1st Test in Brisbane. Selectors have been known to do this sort of thing at all levels of sport. (deny opportunities as part of a selection strategy) Harris and Siddle are our only shoe-ins right now although I'd agree that Starc would be next in line (if Pattinson isn't ready) However, Mitchell is no world beater and needs to bowl with more penetration (he may well do that in this Test) Starc now bowls at 135k's which is a maximum of 10k's short of his top pace. From the outside, it looks like the selectors are trying to send him a message (bowl well enough that we can't drop you or 'rest' you) Faulkner deserves a chance at least and I hope he does well when he gets his opportunity.

He hasn't even been on the field yet and you're demanding that he 'blows the lights out on his debut'? How about we give him a few Tests to see what he's like? He's 23 years old for crying out loud. Do you have the same attitude for all debutantes? Do you want him to fail? He's one of your players - how about wish the bloke well like most fair minded people would?

Antonio Smith getting rubbed out for the 2 remaining practice games could be looked upon as a blessing in disguise! Misses the first regular season game but he's lucky he didn't connect with Incognito (odd surname - only in America?) In other news ... what's going on with the Seahawks 'NSC'? ... The Seahawks believe their kinder, gentler philosophy is the future of football We could try this stuff at the Demons! Something's gotta work

One of the joys of sport is when a team or a player comes out against the odds and does something quite substantial. I had Watto out of the 1st Test in Brisbane for a number of reasons but mainly because he just seemed to have had too many chances and he wasn't delivering. Following on from his solid 68 in the 4th Test he comes out and makes a fantastic 176 in this Test. Not only did he go on with it but he was also was struck a fearsome blow behind the ear from Broad that looked awful in real time. (and in replay) The fact that he batted on for another 80 odd runs was great stuff. Well played Shane Watson. A grand innings and if we win this Test, he'll be largely responsible. Oh and 'TD', you might have to make a provision for Watto at the no.3 spot in the 'Poll' (not that I would change my vote!)

Well done Watto - must be a relieved man. Copped a nasty hit behind the ear from Broad along the way. Let's hope this is a corner turned.

Apparently the type of side that England picked was decided upon in advance. Don't know much about Kerrigan but his 1st class bowling figures are tidy (164 wickets @ 26.52) Just as well we won the toss with the make-up of our XI. We're going to need a good 1st innings score. Smith might get a few overs.

I meant it more so that Siddle and Harris are the only real certainties to start and there's one spot open - the 3rd one. Starc is in front of everyone else right now but he's no world beater. Starc has been known to bowl at mid 140's but for some unknown reason he's dropped a yard or 2 of pace. He's had a few injury issues so that might be the problem. I'd like to see him bowl with a bit more venom - the selectors might feel the same or maybe they're just trying to manage him well. Seems odd that he only ever seems to play one Test at a time. Warner gone. 4 down and we're into the tail

Batting order looks a little shaky. Nice to see Faulkner get a chance - with Cummins out for an extended time and with Pattinson not assured of being fit for the summer we'll need some depth in our bowling. Was surprised to see James' 1st class bowling average was under 23 and he bats at 30 - not too shabby. I like his competitiveness and combative attitude. Not sure Haddin batting at no.6 will last any longer than this Test but you never know. It would be a big departure from how things have normally been done if it is persisted with. The 3rd seamers spot is up for grabs and Faulkner gets his chance here. Starc and Bird are his competitors for the spot and if he has a good game, he could claim that 3rd spot. Alternatively, if Faulkner could bat at an average of 35 and bowl at an average of 30 odd then he might be able to hold down the no.6 spot. Time will tell and from all accounts, he's going to bat at no.7 in this Test - wish him all the best and I hope he has a good debut.

Ha! Yes, the story just keeps getting bigger unless the Cowboys make it. It's interesting that they've only had 1 losing season in their last 8 seasons. In amongst those years they've gone 13-3 and 11-5 so they're capable. Of course, I reserve the right to disavow or repudiate any predictions involving Dallas if 'Jerry' makes any 'off tap' moves like calling the plays from his superbox. Nothing would surprise me with the Cowboys. Can we bet on some of those game changing interceptions from Tony Romo - Yes!

... Arsenal manager Arsene Wenger under intense pressure following shock loss to Aston Villa

There's some good threads away from the footy boards. We've got 4 or 5 San Francisco fans and a few Rams fans on this thread so get ready for some spirited debate. You don't see many arguments here which is a pleasant departure from some of the footy threads. We could do with a few more people posting and there's usually a lot to talk about. A weeks a long time in the NFL and the rule of thumb is whatever was said last week means nothing a week later! Seattle should be right up there again but my mob owe you one from last year - I'm a Packers man! We'd have to meet in the playoffs for that to happen although I noticed we play your blokes in a Preseason game next weekend. At Lambeau. 'cfh' suggested we do our predictions for the year and my early smoky is Dallas. No idea why because they nearly always find a way to self destruct. Just reckon they're due for some good luck. KC could get amongst it as well but probably not enough to get into the playoffs. Not sure on the Broncos - Peyton still manages games very well and he's still a champ. How do you reckon Wilson will go in his 2nd year?